Rubinstein 1966

Performance		0-Rank	0-Score	1-Rank	1-Score	2-Rank	2-Score	3-Rank	3-Score	3R-Rank	3R-Score	4-Rank	4-Score	NED
Afanassiev 2001		13	0.65	56	0.00	26	0.10	26	0.31	46	0.06	27	0.14
Anderszewski 2003		74	0.40	27	0.00	70	0.03	72	0.03	79	0.02	83	0.02
Ashkenazy 1981		50	0.52	48	0.00	52	0.05	57	0.05	82	0.03	63	0.04
Bacha 2000		26	0.60	51	0.00	57	0.04	62	0.04	54	0.05	49	0.04
Badura 1965		66	0.46	44	0.00	19	0.11	23	0.41	29	0.28	14	0.34
Barbosa 1983		33	0.57	6	0.04	6	0.14	8	0.53	16	0.39	7	0.45
Biret 1990		22	0.62	83	0.00	38	0.05	39	0.15	66	0.03	44	0.07
Blet 2003		8	0.69	64	0.00	22	0.11	15	0.45	33	0.16	20	0.27
Block 1995		73	0.40	65	0.00	69	0.03	71	0.03	74	0.03	75	0.03
Blumental 1952		76	0.35	70	0.00	78	0.02	86	0.02	60	0.04	77	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		38	0.56	9	0.02	20	0.10	19	0.43	23	0.26	15	0.33
Brailowsky 1960		35	0.57	26	0.00	37	0.06	33	0.18	41	0.10	29	0.13
Bunin 1987		52	0.51	87	0.00	64	0.05	47	0.05	56	0.04	64	0.04
Bunin 1987b		51	0.52	84	0.00	63	0.05	54	0.05	69	0.04	54	0.04
Chiu 1999		64	0.46	15	0.01	24	0.14	21	0.43	37	0.14	21	0.25
Cohen 1997		79	0.33	79	0.00	27	0.06	41	0.14	34	0.16	25	0.15
Cortot 1951		63	0.46	59	0.00	79	0.02	83	0.02	79	0.03	88	0.02
Csalog 1996		23	0.62	17	0.01	29	0.07	27	0.27	17	0.44	13	0.34
Czerny 1949		59	0.47	43	0.00	46	0.05	50	0.05	63	0.04	59	0.04
Czerny 1990		29	0.59	45	0.00	32	0.06	35	0.17	64	0.04	39	0.08
Duchoud 2007		36	0.57	30	0.00	60	0.04	69	0.04	53	0.04	61	0.04
Ezaki 2006		19	0.62	8	0.02	15	0.08	25	0.39	37	0.12	22	0.22
Falvay 1989		12	0.66	57	0.00	23	0.12	20	0.43	46	0.05	24	0.15
Farrell 1958		20	0.62	46	0.00	49	0.04	63	0.04	58	0.04	53	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		39	0.56	12	0.01	61	0.04	64	0.04	53	0.04	58	0.04
Fliere 1977		5	0.72	13	0.01	5	0.13	5	0.60	37	0.14	18	0.29
Fou 1978		6	0.71	1	0.38	1	0.38	1	0.66	6	0.52	2	0.59
Francois 1956		34	0.57	52	0.00	34	0.05	31	0.21	70	0.04	37	0.09
Friedman 1923		87	-0.03	82	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	79	0.03	90	0.02
Friedman 1923b		88	-0.03	66	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	82	0.03	87	0.02
Friedman 1930		83	0.06	58	0.00	74	0.02	84	0.02	79	0.03	84	0.02
Garcia 2007		80	0.25	21	0.01	85	0.02	85	0.02	84	0.02	85	0.02
Garcia 2007b		84	0.04	73	0.00	86	0.03	78	0.03	85	0.02	89	0.02
Gierzod 1998		44	0.53	80	0.00	65	0.05	56	0.05	74	0.03	60	0.04
Gornostaeva 1994		27	0.60	25	0.00	25	0.13	12	0.46	50	0.04	28	0.14
Groot 1988		7	0.70	4	0.05	10	0.11	7	0.53	35	0.17	17	0.30
Harasiewicz 1955		81	0.25	40	0.00	55	0.05	53	0.05	76	0.03	65	0.04
Hatto 1993		65	0.46	60	0.00	41	0.07	38	0.16	50	0.04	40	0.08
Hatto 1997		45	0.53	16	0.01	39	0.06	34	0.18	43	0.07	32	0.11
Horowitz 1949		53	0.50	50	0.00	31	0.06	40	0.15	39	0.11	30	0.13
Indjic 1988		54	0.49	77	0.00	40	0.05	37	0.17	45	0.05	34	0.09
Kapell 1951		43	0.54	76	0.00	67	0.05	52	0.05	81	0.02	70	0.03
Kissin 1993		15	0.64	31	0.00	17	0.11	9	0.51	39	0.17	19	0.29
Kushner 1989		24	0.62	24	0.00	28	0.06	28	0.26	60	0.04	33	0.10
Luisada 1991		25	0.61	19	0.01	16	0.08	14	0.45	47	0.05	23	0.15
Lushtak 2004		47	0.52	67	0.00	36	0.06	32	0.21	66	0.04	36	0.09
Malcuzynski 1961		18	0.63	39	0.00	50	0.05	51	0.05	64	0.04	55	0.04
Magaloff 1978		37	0.57	53	0.00	56	0.05	49	0.05	61	0.03	52	0.04
Magin 1975		72	0.40	54	0.00	77	0.03	77	0.03	81	0.02	81	0.02
Michalowski 1933		82	0.10	81	0.00	82	0.03	73	0.03	83	0.03	72	0.03
Milkina 1970		2	0.76	7	0.03	7	0.15	6	0.57	17	0.38	5	0.47
Mohovich 1999		4	0.73	2	0.12	3	0.13	2	0.65	14	0.38	4	0.50
Moravec 1969		30	0.59	22	0.01	51	0.04	66	0.04	62	0.04	50	0.04
Morozova 2008		42	0.54	23	0.00	21	0.12	22	0.42	48	0.05	26	0.14
Neighaus 1950		31	0.59	32	0.00	33	0.06	30	0.22	84	0.02	45	0.07
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.38	88	0.00	83	0.03	79	0.03	86	0.02	80	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		28	0.60	68	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.13	59	0.04	43	0.07
Osinska 1989		16	0.64	14	0.01	8	0.16	11	0.48	24	0.27	12	0.36
Pachmann 1927		32	0.58	38	0.00	18	0.11	17	0.44	17	0.46	6	0.45
Paderewski 1930		40	0.56	86	0.00	54	0.05	58	0.05	60	0.03	56	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		61	0.47	72	0.00	47	0.06	45	0.06	63	0.03	51	0.04
Pierdomenico 2008		57	0.48	61	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.11	46	0.05	42	0.07
Poblocka 1999		14	0.64	35	0.00	45	0.05	46	0.05	46	0.05	46	0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932		62	0.47	49	0.00	53	0.04	67	0.04	68	0.03	69	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		77	0.34	28	0.00	73	0.04	68	0.04	68	0.03	68	0.03
Rangell 2001		17	0.63	29	0.00	11	0.09	13	0.45	13	0.30	11	0.37
Richter 1976		67	0.45	55	0.00	72	0.04	70	0.04	80	0.03	71	0.03
Rosen 1989		41	0.54	62	0.00	48	0.05	60	0.05	84	0.02	76	0.03
Rosenthal 1930		56	0.49	37	0.00	68	0.04	65	0.04	61	0.04	62	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		68	0.45	41	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.11	40	0.12	31	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		71	0.41	71	0.00	66	0.05	48	0.05	54	0.05	48	0.05
Rosenthal 1931c		49	0.52	63	0.00	58	0.05	55	0.05	61	0.03	66	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		60	0.47	69	0.00	59	0.05	59	0.05	48	0.05	47	0.05
Rossi 2007		86	0.00	85	0.00	84	0.02	81	0.02	75	0.03	79	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		10	0.67	10	0.02	9	0.11	10	0.49	4	0.55	3	0.52
Rubinstein 1952		1	0.76	3	0.06	2	0.24	4	0.63	6	0.58	1	0.60
Rubinstein 1966		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Schilhawsky 1960		70	0.43	74	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	76	0.03	73	0.03
Shebanova 2002		11	0.66	36	0.00	14	0.08	18	0.43	26	0.31	10	0.37
Smith 1975		46	0.53	20	0.01	35	0.06	29	0.24	76	0.03	38	0.08
Sokolov 2002		58	0.47	34	0.00	75	0.03	76	0.03	77	0.03	67	0.03
Sztompka 1959		55	0.49	90	0.00	62	0.04	61	0.04	56	0.05	57	0.04
Tomsic 1995		3	0.73	5	0.04	4	0.12	3	0.64	25	0.29	8	0.43
Uninsky 1932		78	0.34	47	0.00	81	0.03	74	0.03	75	0.03	74	0.03
Uninsky 1971		69	0.43	33	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	82	0.02	82	0.02
Wasowski 1980		48	0.52	75	0.00	30	0.07	36	0.17	84	0.03	41	0.07
Zak 1937		9	0.67	18	0.01	12	0.09	16	0.44	21	0.31	9	0.37
Zak 1951		21	0.62	11	0.02	13	0.12	24	0.39	28	0.27	16	0.32
Random 1		90	-0.10	78	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	50	0.05	78	0.03
Random 2		89	-0.04	42	0.00	76	0.02	82	0.02	11	0.37	35	0.09
Random 3		85	0.00	89	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	84	0.02	86	0.02

Column descriptions

• Performance:
• 0-Rank/0-Score: 0-Score is equivalent to Pearson correlation of the entire data sequence between the reference performance and a test performance. 0-Rank is the sorting order of the 0-scores (highest score has a rank of 1).
• 1-Rank/1-Score: 1-Score is the area fraction covered by a particular performance in the scape plot (see image above). These values should not be taken literally, since they are sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
• 2-Rank/2-Score: 2-Score values are equivalent to 1-Score values with all higher-ranking performances removed before the calculation of the area of coverage in the scape is calculated. Improvment over the 1-Rank scores, but still somewhat sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
• 3-Rank/3-Score: Similar to 2-Rank calculations. The bottom 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are kept constant as a noise floor for the similarity measurement. Then one-by-one the top 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are superimposed with the noise-floor performances, and a 3-score is measured as the area covered in the scape. This measure is not sentisive to the Hatto Effect.
• 3R-Rank/3R-Score: Reverse 3-rank/3-scores. 3-rankings and scores are not symmetric (A->B values are different from B->A values). So this column represents similarity measures in the opposite direction.
• 4-Rank/4-Score: The geometric mean between 3-scores and 3R-scores. This column gives the best overall similarity ranking between the various performances (see color codes below).
• NED: Noise Equivalient Distance (not yet implemented)

Color codes for 3-rank listings:

• red = strongly similar performance to target
• orange = moderately similar performance
• yellow = weakly similar performance
• green = marginally similar/dissimilar performance
• white = dissimilar to target
• blue = false positive (has high 3-rank score but low 3R-rank score)

3-rank/scores are not symmetric, so the 3R-rank/score columns give the 3-rank/scores going in the opposite direction. More matches in the 3-rank column than in the 3R-rank column indicates an individualistic performance, while more matches in the 3R-rank column indicates a mainstream performance.

If a 3-rank and a 3R-rank are both marked as similar to each other, then there is a possible direct relation between the performances. If one is similar to the other but not in the reverse direction, then the similarity is more likely to be by chance (performers randomly chose a similar interpretation).